ML102590682
| ML102590682 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 09/16/2010 |
| From: | Mary Spencer NRC/OGC |
| To: | NRC/SECY |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-443-LR, License Renewal 6, RAS 18657 | |
| Download: ML102590682 (6) | |
Text
September 16, 2010 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 50-443 FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC
)
)
(Seabrook Station, Unit 1)
)
)
NRC STAFFS ANSWER TO FRIENDS OF THE COAST AND NEW ENGLAND COALITIONS EXTENSION REQUEST INTRODUCTION On September 15, 2010 Friends of the Coast and New England Coalition (FOC/NEC) responded to the New Hampshire State Attorney Generals extension request, supporting the request, provided that any extension granted to New Hampshire also apply to FOC/NEC.1 As the Staff has previously stated, while a reasonable extension for the State of New Hampshire (New Hampshire) may be warranted given the New Hampshire Attorney Generals unique governmental interest as the representative of the State of New Hampshire and its residents, an extension should not be granted to any other potential party absent a of showing of good cause by that potential party. Neither FOC/NECs general argument that 60 days is insufficient time to prepare a hearing request nor their assertion that they have encountered difficulties 1 Friends of the Coast and New England Coalitions Answer to New Hampshire Attorney Generals Request for Extension (September 15, 2010) (FOC/NEC Answer). Friends of the Coast and New England Coalition failed to file this request for an extension in compliance with 10 C.F.R. § 2.302, which requires all filings in adjudicatory proceedings to be sent through the NRCs E-Filing system. It appears that FOC/NEC representative Raymond Shadis has been added to the E-Filing system.
comparable to those reported by New Hampshire2 constitute good cause for an extension.
Consequently, FOC/NECs request to receive any extension granted to the State of New Hampshire should be denied.
DISCUSSION The Staff has previously briefed the background of this proceeding and the legal standards for extension requests.3 Turning to FOC/NECs request, which is the second follow-on by a non-governmental entity to New Hampshires request, the Staff submits that FOC/NEC has not demonstrated special circumstances amounting to good cause for an extension.
In support of its request, FOC/NECs asserts that the initial Commission notice that provides for 60 days is simply not enough time to review an application and formulate contentions and that it is unjustifiable and spurious4 to expect states and the public to begin review of an application before the application is docketed. This argument does not demonstrate good cause for an extension and is better suited to a petition for rulemaking.5 In promulgating the 2004 changes to the Commissions rules of practice, the Commission solicited and considered comments on the timing of filing requests for hearing.6 In establishing the 60-day deadline, the Commission stated that 60 days is ample time for potential parties to review applications and prepare filings and, in most cases, potential parties will have more than 60 2 Id. at 5.
3 See NRC Staffs Answer to New Hampshire Attorney Generals Request for Ninety-Day Extension (Staff Answer).
4 FOC/NEC Answer at 4.
5 See 10 C.F.R. § 2.802.
6 Changes to Adjudicatory Process, 69 Fed. Reg. 2182, 2199 (Jan. 14, 2004).
days to become familiar with the application due to noticing of the applications receipt and availability on the NRC website and/or the Federal Register.7 Furthermore, if it were not the Commissions expectation that potential parties begin reviewing applications upon issuance of a Federal Register notice that the application is available for review, there would be no purpose in issuing the notice. In fact, the Commission has considered when public notice of the availability of the application was provided in determining whether good cause for an extension request existed.8 FOC/NECs assertion that 60 days is insufficient time in this particular case lacks merit.
The limitations cited by FOC/NEC are no more substantial than those raised by the organizations in Hope Creek and Salem.9 The Commission has held that a public interest organizations time and resource limitations do not constitute the kind of special circumstances warranting an extension.10 Moreover, the burden on FOC/NEC is less than the burden on the petitioner organizations in Salem and Hope Creek. In Salem and Hope Creek, the petitioner organizations had 60 days to review two distinct license renewal applications for three units 7 Id. at 2199-2200. Although FOC/NEC provides no explanation for its concluding reference to Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Judge Michael Farrars concurring comments in the MOX proceeding, it appears that this quotation is in the same vein as FOC/NECs argument that 60 days is generally insufficient, and thus does not constitute special circumstances amounting to good cause. See Shaw AREVA MOX Services (Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility), LBP-08-11, 67 NRC 460, 497, 506 (2008)). This dicta by an Administrative Judge, is not precedent that would serve to reverse the Commissions deliberative rulemaking process establishing its adjudicatory procedures.
8 See e.g., Detroit Edison Co. (Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 3), CLI-09-4, 69 NRC 80, 82 (2009) (Fermi).
9 See Requests for Extension of Time to Petition for Hearing in the Matter of PSEG Nuclear, LLC License Renewal Applications, Nov. 2, 2009 (Salem & Hope Creek Extension Request) at 1.
10 Fermi, CLI-09-4, 69 NRC at 82.
two pressurized reactors and one boiling water reactor.11 Here, there is only one application involving a single unit. Therefore, the Commission should view FOC/NECs request with disfavor.
Finally, the persuasiveness of FOC/NECs reasons for requesting an extension of time are diminished by the fact that FOC/NEC did not request additional time until after New Hampshire filed its request and until less than a week before the filing deadline. If FOC/NEC was encountering difficulties comparable to those reported by New Hampshire, it should not have waited to the last minute to make its request.
CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, FOC/NECs request for an extension should be denied for lack of good cause.
Respectfully submitted, Signed (electronically) by Mary Baty Spencer Counsel for the NRC Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop O-15 D21 Washington, DC 20555-0001 (301) 415-1324 mary.baty@nrc.gov Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 16th day of September, 2010 11 Salem & Hope Creek Extension Request at 1.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
Docket No. 50-443 FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC
)
)
(Seabrook Station, Unit 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of NRC STAFFS ANSWER TO FRIENDS OF THE COAST AND NEW ENGLAND COALITIONS EXTENSION REQUEST in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by Electronic Information Exchange this 16th day of September, 2010.
Office of the Secretary Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff Mail Stop: O-16C1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication Mail Stop: O-16C1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: OCAAMAIL.Resource@nrc.gov Mitchell Ross, Esq.
Antonio Fernandez, Esq.
NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC 700 Universe Boulevard Juno Beach, FL 33408 E-mail: mitch.ross@fpl.com E-mail: antonio.fernandez@fpl.com Michael A. Delaney, Esq.
K. Allen Brooks, Esq.
Peter Roth, Esq.
Office of the Attorney General 33 Capitol Street Concord, NH 03301 E-mail: michael.a.delaney@doj.nh.gov E-mail.k.allen.brooks@doj.nh.gov E-mail: peter.roth@doj.nh.gov Steven Hamrick, Esq.
NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC 801 Pennsylvania Ave NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20004 Steven.hamrick@fpl.com Raymond Shadis Friends of the Coast New England Coalition Post Office Box 98 Edgecomb, Maine 04556 E-mail: shadis@prexar.com Paul Gunter, Director Beyond Nuclear 6930 Carroll Ave Suite 400 Takoma Park, MD 20912 E-mail: paul@beyondnuclear.org Signed (electronically) by Mary Baty Spencer Counsel for the NRC Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop O-15 D21 Washington, DC 20555-0001 (301) 415-1324 mary.baty@nrc.gov